After a read-through of the Wall Street Journal’s “What They Know” series on online privacy (found here), one can hardly be faulted for recalling the dystopian vision of Big Brother from George Orwell’s “1984.” Many (popular) websites allow third-party “tracker files” to monitor your clicks and browser history to gain as much information about users as possible, chiefly in the name of creating well-targeted advertising (What They Know). As a response, the private sector and government alike have proposed two distinct solutions to combat these online threats to privacy: a privacy market and regulations on data collection, respectively. Accordingly, businesses relying on data collection as a top-line strategy will have to refocus their efforts to reach new customers.
One proposed private sector solution is the commoditization of privacy. Essentially, this concept centers on transforming “personal data into an ‘asset class’ by giving people the right to manage and sell it on their own behalf” (Angwin and Steel). While companies like Microsoft Corp., whose Internet Explorer 9 browser is slated to include a “Do-Not-Track” tool (Wingfield and Angwin), and McAfee Inc. are concentrating efforts on providing “opt-out” privacy features, others are seeking to create a full-fledged marketplace for the purchase and sale of online privacy (Angwin and Steel). Allow Ltd., for instance, is a start-up that “offers to sell people's personal information on their behalf, and give them 70% of the sale” (Angwin and Steel). Fans of free-markets should rejoice at this burgeoning industry, as it essentially monetizes users’ privacy data, thereby allowing them to more fairly weigh the costs and benefits of their privacy. While the marketers who benefit from boundless data collection may cringe at the idea of paying more than pennies for data, it is likely that the information users sell to marketers will reveal their preferences more accurately than mined information (Angwin and Steel). Therefore, by purchasing this higher priced, higher quality information from users, companies will be able to tailor product offers and ads to those who are actually willing to consider them.
The argument does not end there, though. For every fan of this new, laissez-faire approach to privacy, there is inevitably another who decries companies’ breach of user privacy and demands that the government intervene. In fact, legislation recently proposed by Senators John McCain and John Kerry seeks to create an “online privacy bill of rights” to protect users from rampant data collection (Angwin). Indeed, the issue has become the hot topic in Washington; the Senate Judiciary Committee’s February announcement that it was creating the Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology, and the Law has galvanized recent efforts to bring Internet privacy issues to the forefront (Valentino-DeVries). As recently as Thursday, March 10, two Senate committees have engaged in a battle to lay claim to the investigation into user privacy (Valentino-DeVries). While the exact details of the proposed legislation and investigation have yet to be finalized, a successful government campaign against tracking would doubtlessly end in greater regulation over data-collecting companies. With life insurance companies actively testing the viability of data gathered online as a risk assessment tool (Scism and Maremont), many will likely welcome this regulation.
However, legislators must be careful that the regulation of online privacy does not channel data-reliant businesses to a more threatening place. Justin Basini, cofounder of Allow Ltd., notes that during his time at Capital One, targeted mailings had an unimpressive one percent response rate (Angwin and Steel). With such lackluster results, it is unlikely that the troves of personal data floating in cyberspace really threaten to manipulate or exploit us. Alternatively, increased government regulation over the tracking industry could, quite paradoxically, accelerate developments of new data collection methods. Put simply, if the government defines permissible and impermissible tracking methods, the tracking industry will surely pour its resources into developing effective mining techniques that skirt these regulations.
Given a choice between the two scenarios, I would prefer the former to the latter. Like all technology, tracking is subject to obsolescence without the power of government intervention. As soon as tracking is forbidden, technology will allow for new, probably more potent methods to be used to gather information about consumers. Rather than playing this futile game of catch-up, consumers must take personal accountability for their own privacy. Browsers with a “Do-Not-Track” tool and other security features that empower consumers to make their own privacy decisions are the solution, not the government.
Works Cited
Angwin, Julia, and Emily Steel. "Web's Hot New Commodity: Privacy." Wall Street
Journal. 27 Feb. 2011. Web. 15 Mar. 2011.
(http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703529004576160764037920274.html).
Angwin, Julia. "Proposed Bill Would Put Curbs on Data Gathering." Wall Street
Angwin, Julia. "Proposed Bill Would Put Curbs on Data Gathering." Wall Street
Scism, Leslie, and Mark Maremont. "Insurers Test Data Profiles to Identify Risky
Valentino-DeVries, Jennifer. "Senators Scramble to Stake Claim on Web Privacy."
"What They Know." Web log post. Wall Street Journal. Web. 15 Mar. 2011.
Wingfield, Nick, and Julia Angwin. "Microsoft Adds Do-Not-Track Tool to Browser."
Internet privacy has become a bigger and bigger issue with every new technological development. The more ways people can access the internet, the more ways people are able to track what others are searching. With the boom of mobile phones that are able to surf the web and devices such as the iPad and Motorola Xoom, internet gurus are having a field day tracking the billions of people that have internet access. This scare will enable security companies like McAfee to create more advanced packages for customers that will help to protect their “internet identity.” Companies and telemarketers are now allowed to start calling cell phone numbers if people have not registered their number with the National Do Not Call Registry. I imagine it can only be a matter of time before people will find a way to use internet browsing as a way to track one’s information and get the IP address and/or email account associated with anyone on the internet and send them anything from viruses to advertisements.
ReplyDeleteAs college students, it is difficult to imagine a time without the internet. However, it is a relatively new invention. Governmental policy and law lags behind technology, especially because technology advances and changes so rapidly. Online privacy has become increasingly more of a concern with more awareness of identity theft, phishing, and website tracking. The government is now beginning to consider becoming involved in the regulation of the internet, however the internet is huge, international, and extremely complex. Politicians writing up legislature is an inefficient and slow way of dealing with online privacy issues. Technology is changing far too quickly for laws to keep up. I think Matt is right in saying that the future for online privacy will be in software and user enabled tools. With changes in technology, it should be the individual's responsibility to know the risks and prevent against the technologies that they are using.
ReplyDelete